P. C. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS case exemplifies that justice delayed is justice denied. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the present appellant praying for restitution of conjugal rights u/ S. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The suit was instituted on 16-11-68 and the dispute is still pending in this appeal. At the institution of the suit the plaintiff-husband is described in the plaint as 42 years of age and that of the wife-respondent, against whom the prayer for restitution of conjugal rights was prayed for, was 35 years of age. During pendency of the litigation for the last 25 years the husband must have been 67 years old and the age of the wife must have been 60 years and the restitution of conjugal rights, if allowed hereafter will carry no sense.

( 2 ) THE history of the case as narrated by the learned trial Court in the judgment passed in the suit is that the plaintiff had earlier filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights in the court of District Judge, Bolangir in the year 1957. In that suit the District Judge orders that the plaintiff should pay maintenance of Rs. 15/- per month and Rs. 25/- as cost of the litigation. The said order was passed on 6-10-1958. Though